Johnson: Evaluating Minnesota school referendum issues

Opinion editor’s note: Strib Voices publishes a mix of commentary online and in print each day. To contribute, click here.

•••

As increasing numbers of candidate yards signs dot the Minnesota landscape, sprinkled in among them are “Vote Yes” and “Vote No” placards. That latter signage typically refers to school excess levy referendums — ballot requests that ask for voter permission to raise property taxes to support local schools.

During an especially contentious presidential campaign, some of the down-ticket, especially local issues can easily get lost. That mustn’t happen. The competition between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump is expected to bring out a number of new and younger voters who have never weighed in on an education ballot measure. They are particularly encouraged to carefully consider school funding issues. Decisions to send additional funding to schools have a direct impact on school districts, communities and taxpayer budgets, so all citizens should study the funding requests carefully before making those choices.

According to the Minnesota Department of Revenue, the 2024 certified property tax levies for all local governments totaled approximately $12.2 billion — an 6.8% increase over the previous year. Of that total, nearly $4 billion is slated to go to schools. That amount is mostly made up of dollars that voters have agreed to tax themselves. In Minnesota, there are generally three types of school referendums: levies for operating expenses that go to the general fund, capital projects for new or renovated facilities and bonding requests.

This year, Minnesotans in 45 of the state’s 325 traditional districts will be asked to pay more to support their schools or to renew existing levies, according to the Minnesota School Boards Association. Of those districts seeking additional funding, 12 are in metro areas, including Minneapolis, Lakeville and Robbinsdale. The remainder are spread across the state. Those communities include Comfrey, Moorhead, Cook County, Ely, Rochester and Blue Earth schools.

Here are ways voters are encouraged to evaluate local school referendums:

Check the school website, where you’ll find the strongest arguments the administration and school board are making for the funding request. If there is an organized opposition to the referendum, there should be available information on that effort as well. Public financial information regarding the district budget is also available to help voters determine how current dollars are being spent.

Grassroots sleuthing is perhaps the best way to get the skinny on school ballot issues. If there are school board races being contested in your district, ask questions of the candidates about the levy request, why it is needed and how it would be managed and spent.

Be sure to check the language of the referendum on your ballot. Those that will raise taxes are required to explicitly state it. The tagline will read: “By voting ‘yes’ on this ballot question, you are voting for a property tax increase.”

A few of the requests are levy renewals that do not seek new funding. Renewals simply extend a tax that is already being paid. That tagline for renewals will read: “By voting ‘yes’ on this ballot question, you are voting to renew an existing referendum that is scheduled to expire.”

Part of voter due diligence on voting for school funding also involves close scrutiny of whether a district has demonstrated responsible stewardship of its finances. Check media reports to see whether there have been any budgeting or funding problems with the district and, if so, how they were resolved.

The economy and taxes are major issues in the presidential campaign and can impact whether voters believe they can afford increases for schools. Another challenge will be concerns that schools have received large increases from the state already.

Minneapolis school leaders, for example, are proposing a ballot measure that would replace an $18-million-a-year capital project levy with a new 10-year levy that would raise $38 million annually. The money would go mostly for technological expenditures. They report that taxes on the median $350,000 property would rise by $8 a month, or $96 a year, if the request is approved. That sounds like a modest request but is only part of the total tax bill that will ultimately include increases from the city, county and other local governments that do not require voter approval. Scott Croonquist, executive director of the Association of Metropolitan School Districts, said “the narrative was that our schools received historically high funding [during the pandemic] … but that [funding] came with historically numerous mandates.”

The loss of federal COVID-era funding contributes strongly to why some districts are seeking new levies. Armed with accurate information, Minnesotans can and should make informed choices for their schools on the Nov. 5 ballot.